In the ongoing insolvency proceedings for Binani Cement at the NCLT, creditor Exim Bank claimed as much right to recovery of its dues as other creditors. It also argued that its negotiations with a bidder did not tantamount to a contract with that bidder.
Exim Bank counsel Krishnaraj Thakar said this while countering the argument put forth by Dalmia Bharat counsel S.K. Kapur, who held that IDBI and Exim Bank were two separate categories of creditors. These two institutions had joined the insolvency proceedings first moved by Bank of Baroda. The total outstanding is ₹7,281 crore.
A division bench comprising Justice Jinan K.R. and Justice Madan Balachandra Gosavi is hearing case. Justice Jinan asked the Exim Bank counsel why he did not oppose the H1 bid by Rajputana Properties (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dalmia Cements).
‘Multiple plans’
Mr. Kapoor’s earlier argument was that UltraTech’s offer should be considered ‘non-responsive’ as it had submitted more than one resolution plan. Reiterating this point, he said, “The process document lays down some protocol and according to that no change or supplemental information to the resolution plan shall be accepted after the submission of the plan. Here, the resolution applicant has submitted more than one resolution plan so it should be non-responsive.” UltraTech and Dalmia Bharat Cement are locked in a battle to acquire Binani Cement, which has a 11.25 million-tonne capacity with units in Dubai and China. UltraTech had reportedly upped its offer to ₹7,990 crore against Dalmia’s ₹6,600 crore.
Binani Industries has recently entered into an in-principle understanding with UltraTech, offering to pay off all the dues to its creditors within two weeks and pleaded for termination of insolvency proceedings in the Kolkata bench of NCLT.
It has sought shareholders nod to sell off Binani Cement equity shares and 100 % of its preference shares to UltraTech.
